[virtmach] Your VM

MickaŽl Pointier virtmach@iecc.com
Tue, 29 May 2001 09:18:43 +0200


> I know you asked for every body elses ideas but the VM that
> I made seems slow to me when thinking of the average number
> of instructions per second that my VM does (600,000-800,000) but
> after writing a small graphics demo (blits, putpixles,
> textout, clear_to_color) it turns out that the VM is more
> than fast enough to do what I need. 

Of course, if the script code is only used to sequence very high
level/cpu intensive functions like those 2D treatments you're talking
about, then the script code will almost not beeing visible on a profiling
evaluation of the code :)


> It only has 46 instructions

What kind of instructions, does it look like say 6502 processor kind
of instructions ? (load, store, shift left or right, and so on).


> (so far), 36 (32bit) general registers where each byte, and
> short (16bit) can be individualy accessed, 

Interesting, like accessing AL or AH on x86 registers ? (except you
can do it for the upper part of EAX too :)

> a stack pointer
> register, a RET (return value, for functions) register,

Does it support local variables ? Can you access any value 
directly from memory/stack, or should you load it into one
of your 36 general registers first ?


> native code can be called from the VM,

Seems obvious, since it's the only way to be able to access the
core system functionalities, librairies, and such.


> and VM code can be called by native code.

Interesting. How do you "declare" to the code that a particular
piece (function) of VM code exists, how do you handle parameters
exchange between VM code and native code ?



> This VM is one that I'll be using in a game I've
> been planning, it will also be running code generated
> by a higher level language compiler that I'm close
> to completing. I do belive It will be fast enough.

 
> Now I have a question: does any one know for sure
> if an array of function pointers is faster than
> a switch case?

>From experience it depends both of the CPU type and
quality of the compiler.

For instance, it looks like Rx000 processors (mips core)
have trouble to keep their cache state if you jump from
a memory loaded adress. It results in a lot of clock cycles
wasted because the branch prediction is broken. So it's
better when you have very few cases to use many IF
statements.

For the switch, in general is a good idea to have values
that follow in memory. With some (good) compilers, the
code will be a computed jump on some other it will be a
very long list of "IF not value then jump after"...

But typically on a PC, using pointer tables (like in virtual
function tables in C++) will almost never lead to bad 
performances. You have to consider too that the pointer
list requires a good data cache, while the if based methods
makes use of the code cache. Depending of the size of the
executed code, and of the amount of data you manipulate
it can be wise to use one or the other method !

If you move a lot of data, there are risks for your data cache
to be trashed => better use if based method :)


Hope it helps

    Mickael Pointier